Mother's Touch Care Limited

On this page

• Overview
• Assessing needs
• Delivering evidence-based care and treatment
• How staff, teams and services work together
• Supporting people to live healthier lives
• Monitoring and improving outcomes
• Consent to care and treatment

Effective – this means we looked for evidence that people’s care, treatment and support achieved good outcomes and promoted a good quality of life, based on best available evidence. This is the first assessment for this service. This key question has been rated good. This meant people’s outcomes were consistently good, and people’s feedback confirmed this.

This service scored 71 (out of 100) for this area. Find out what we look at when we assess this area and How we calculate these scores.

The provider did not always make sure people’s care was effective because they did not always check and discuss people’s health, care, wellbeing and communication needs with them.

People’s needs were assessed before they started using the service. Care plans were then developed based on the initial assessments. For 1 person we found that their care plan on personal care was quite basic, as opposed to others which were sufficiently detailed. This was because it just set out the tasks to be performed by staff without describing them in a person-centred way. The registered manager told us they would review and update the care.

People and their relatives were involved in this process which meant they reflected what was important to the person. A relative told us, “[Registered manager] came in with another chap. They asked me all about them [person], their requirements, what they needed doing.” Care plans covered areas including personal care, health conditions and medicines. They were subject to regular review which meant they were able to reflect people’s needs as they changed over time. A relative said, “Yeah, we had that [a review] about a month ago. They came in and reviewed everything.”

The provider planned and delivered people’s care with them, including what was important and mattered to them. They did this in line with legislation and current evidence-based good practice and standards.

The provider was able to provide evidence-based care and treatment. Policies were in line with national good practice and care was given in a person-centred way, in line with the person’s wishes, and people were involved in their assessment of need. Support was provided in line with their cultural and diverse needs.

The provider worked well across teams and services to support people. They made sure people only needed to tell their story once by sharing their assessment of needs when people moved between different services.

The provider worked with people, relatives, staff and other services to support people. People were involved in developing their care plans and there were systems for them to provide on-going feedback. Regular staff meetings were held and there were staff groups on WhatsApp to share information about people and keeping staff up to date with any changes.

The provider supported people to manage their health and wellbeing to maximise their independence, choice and control. Staff supported people to live healthier lives and where possible, reduce their future needs for care and support.

People’s health care needs were covered in their care plans. Where staff supported people with meal preparation, they encouraged people to make healthy choices, while recognising that people had the right to choose what they wanted. The service supported people to attend medical appointments. A relative told us, “When [person] had hospital appointments they [staff] went with them.” The provider had also contacted healthcare agencies on behalf of people. For example, they made a referral to the occupational therapy team for a person whose mobility needs had changed.

The provider routinely monitored people’s care to continuously improve it. They ensured that outcomes were positive and consistent, and that they met both clinical expectations and the expectations of people themselves.

Support was monitored continuously through daily notes and other records as appropriate. People were able to provide feedback on the support they received to help improve outcomes for them.

The provider told people about their rights around consent and respected these when delivering person-centred care.

People were able to consent to their care as much as possible. Mental capacity assessments had been carried out. Where people lacked the mental capacity to make decisions, relatives made decisions on their behalf. Relatives told us people were able to consent to care. A Relative said, “Staff have explained to [person] what they are there to do and they listen to [person]. They don’t railroad them into things.”